| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Was PR#232: Fix the parsing of goal selectors.
|
|
The no-inversion and maximal abstraction over dependencies now
supports abstraction over goal variables rather than only on "rel"
variables. In particular, it now works consistently using
"intro H; refine (match H with ... end)" or
"refine (fun H => match H with ... end)".
By doing so, we ensure that all three strategies are tried in all
situations where a return clause has to be inferred, even in the
context of a "refine".
See antepenultimate commit for discussion.
|
|
even when no type constraint is given.
This no-inversion and maximal abstraction over dependencies in (rel)
variables heuristic was used only when a type constraint was given.
By doing so, we ensure that all three strategies "inversion with
dependencies as evars", "no-inversion and maximal abstraction over
dependencies in (rel) variables", "no-inversion and no abstraction
over dependencies" are tried in all situations where a return clause
has to be inferred.
See penultimate commit for discussion.
|
|
The no-inversion no-dependency heuristic was used only in the absence
of type constraint. We may now use it also in the presence of a type
constraint.
See previous commit for discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This happens when recursive notations are used to define recursive
notations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because refreshing Prop is not semantics-preserving,
the new universe is >= Set, so cannot be minimized to Prop
afterwards.
|
|
In congruence, refresh universes including the Set/Prop ones so that
congruence works with cumulativity, not restricting itself to the
inferred types of terms that are manipulated but allowing them to be
used at more general types. This fixes bug #4609.
|
|
This fixes some parsing problems when doing things like
[let n := 2 in idtac n]. See bug #4877.
|
|
|
|
internalization.
Patch by PMP, test-suite fix by MS.
|
|
|
|
Preserve a compatibility whether the Structural Injection flag is on
or not.
|
|
Comments
--------
- The tactic specialize conveys a somehow intuitive reasoning concept
and I would support continuing maintaining it even if the design
comes in my opinion with some oddities. (Note that the experience of
MathComp and SSReflect also suggests that specialize is an
interesting concept in itself).
There are two variants to specialize:
- specialize (H args) with H an hypothesis looks natural: we
specialize H with extra arguments and the "as pattern" clause comes
naturally as an extension of it, destructuring the result using the
pattern.
- specialize term with bindings makes the choice of fully applying the
term filling missing expressions with bindings and to then behave as
generalize. Wouldn't we like a more fine-grained approach and the
result to remain in the context?
In this second case, the "as" clause works as if the term were posed
in the context with "pose proof".
|
|
There were three versions of injection:
1. "injection term" without "as" clause:
was leaving hypotheses on the goal in reverse order
2. "injection term as ipat", first version:
was introduction hypotheses using ipat in reverse order without
checking that the number of ipat was the size of the injection
(activated with "Unset Injection L2R Pattern Order")
3. "injection term as ipat", second version:
was introduction hypotheses using ipat in left-to-right order
checking that the number of ipat was the size of the injection
and clearing the injecting term by default if an hypothesis
(activated with "Set Injection L2R Pattern Order", default one from 8.5)
There is now:
4. "injection term" without "as" clause, new version:
introducing the components of the injection in the context in
left-to-right order using default intro-patterns "?"
and clearing the injecting term by default if an hypothesis
(activated with "Set Structural Injection")
The new versions 3. and 4. are the "expected" ones in the sense that
they have the following good properties:
- introduction in the context is in the natural left-to-right order
- "injection" behaves the same with and without "as", always
introducing the hypotheses in the goal what corresponds to the
natural expectation as the changes I made in the proof scripts for
adaptation confirm
- clear the "injection" hypothesis when an hypothesis which is the
natural expectation as the changes I made in the proof scripts for
adaptation confirm
The compatibility can be preserved by "Unset Structural Injection" or
by calling "simple injection".
The flag is currently off.
|
|
simplifying and generalizing the grammar entries for injection,
discriminate and simplify_eq.
|
|
This commit documents par:, fixes its semantics so that is
behaves like all:, supports (toplevel) abstract and optimizes
toplevel solve.
`par: solve [tac]` is equivalent to `Ltac tac1 := solve[tac]...par: tac1`
but is optimized for failures: if one goal fails all are aborted
immediately.
`par: abstract tac` runs abstract on the generated proof terms. Nested
abstract calls are not supported.
|
|
Looping on jenkins only, couldn't reproduce locally.
To be investigated further.
|
|
|
|
As noticed by C. Cohen it was confusingly different from standard
notation.
|
|
|
|
Fix test-suite files
|
|
Now that typeclasses eauto uses the new eauto.
|
|
Add an option to force backtracking at toplevel, which
is used by default when calling typeclasses eauto on a set of goals.
They might be depended on by other subgoals, so the tactic should
be backtracking by default, a once can make it not backtrack.
|
|
Report limit exceeded on _any_ branch so that we pursue search
if it was reached at least once. Add example by N. Tabareau in
test-suite.
|
|
Fix typo in proofview
|
|
with full backtracking across multiple goals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
They can still be used at the toplevel.
|
|
This allows to write things like this:
split; 2: intro _; exact I
or like this:
eexists ?[x]; ?[x]: exact 0; trivial
This has the side-effect on making the '?' before '[x]' mandatory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This add LtacProfiling. Much of the code was written by Tobias Tebbi
(@tebbi), and Paul A. Steckler was invaluable in porting the code to Coq
v8.5 and Coq trunk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
constants up to their canonical name (taken from Daniel's
formalization of Puiseux theorem).
|
